Journal of Information Technology Services (한국IT서비스학회지)

Korea Society of IT Services (한국IT서비스학회)
권호 표지

Classification Scheme of Usability Problems : Literature Review and New Conceptual Framework

사용성 문제의 분류 체계 : 문헌분석 및 새로운 개념적 프레임워크

  • 함동한 (영국 Middlesex University, School of Engineering and Information Sciences)
  • Published : 2008.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

It is widely known that usability is a critical quality attribute of IT systems. Many studies have developed various methods for finding out usability problems. Usability professionals have emphasized that usability should be integrated into the development life cycle in order to maximize the usability of systems with minimal cost. To achieve this, it is essential to classify usability problems systematically and connect them into the activities of designing user interfaces and tasks. However, there is a lack of framework or method for these two problems and thus remains a challengeable research issue. As a beginning study, this paper proposes a conceptual framework for addressing the two issues. We firstly summarize usability-related studies so far, including usability factors and evaluation methods. Secondly, we review seven approaches to identifying and classifying usability problems. Based on this review and opinions of usability engineers in real industry as well as the review results, this paper proposes a framework comprising three viewpoints, from which more sound classification scheme of usability problems can be inductively developed.

Keywords

References

  1. Andre, T., H. Hartson, S. Belz and F. McCreary, "The user action framework：A reliable foundation for usability engineering support tools", International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol.54, No.1(2001), pp.107-136 https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.2000.0441
  2. Bevan, N., "Quality in use：Meeting user needs in quality", The Journal of Systems and Software, Vol.49, No.1(1999), pp.89-96 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-1212(99)00070-9
  3. Boy, G., Cognitive function analysis, Ablex Publishing Corporation, Conneticut, 1998
  4. Card, D., "Learning from our mistakes with defect causal analysis", IEEE Software, Vol.15, No.1(1998), pp.56-63
  5. Chillarge, R., I. Bhandari, J. Chaar, M. Halliday, D. Moebus, B. Ray, and M. Wong, "Orthogonal defect classification-A concept for in-process measurements", IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol.18, No.11(1992), pp.943-956 https://doi.org/10.1109/32.177364
  6. Gillan, D. and R. Bias, "Usability science I ：Foundations", International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.13, No.4 (2001), pp.351-372 https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327590IJHC1304_02
  7. Freimut, B., Developing and using defect classification schemes(IESE-Report No. 072.01/E), Fraunhofer IESE, 2001
  8. Hollnagel, E., "The phenotype of erroneous action", International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, Vol.39, No.2(1993), pp.1-32 https://doi.org/10.1006/imms.1993.1051
  9. Hollnagel, E., Cognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Method, Elsevier, Oxford, 1998
  10. Horbæk, K., "Current practice in measuring usability：Challenges to usability studies and research", International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol.64, No.2(2006), pp.79-102 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.06.002
  11. Howarth, J., T. Andre, and R. Hartson, "A structured process for transforming usability data into usability information", Journal of Usability Studies, Vol.3, No.1(2007), pp.7-23
  12. Huber, J., A Comparison of IBM's Orthogonal Defect Classification to Hewlett Packcard's Defect Origins, Types, and Modes, Hewlett Packard Company, 1999
  13. ISO/IEC 9241, Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminal-Part 11：Guidance on usability, ISO/IEC, 1998
  14. Ivory, M. and M. Hearst, "The state of the art in automating usability evaluation of user interfaces," ACM Computing Survey, Vol.33, No.4(2001), pp. 470-516 https://doi.org/10.1145/503112.503114
  15. Keehan, S., H. Hartson, D. Kafura and R. Schulman, "The usability problem taxonomy： A framework for classification and analysis", Empirical Software Engineering, Vol.4, No.1(1999), pp.71-104 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009855231530
  16. Kruchten, P., "Casting software design in the function-behaviour-structure framework", IEEE Software, Vol.22, No.2(2005), pp.52-58
  17. Lavery, D., G. Cockton, and M. Atkinson, "Comparison of evaluation methods using structured usability problem reports", Vol.16, No.4/5(1997), pp.246-266 https://doi.org/10.1080/014492997119824
  18. Law, E., Proposal for a New COST Action 294：Towards the Maturation of IT Usability Evaluation, COST Office, 2004
  19. Leszak, M., D. Perry and D. Stoll, "Classification and evaluation of defects in a project retrospective", The Journal of Systems and Software, Vol.61, No.3(2002), pp.173-187 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-1212(01)00146-7
  20. Nielsen, J., Usability engineering, AP Professional, San Diego, 1993
  21. Peuple, J. L. and R. Scane, User interface design, Crucial, Exeter, 2004
  22. Rasmussen, J., Information processing and human-machine interaction-An approach to cognitive engineering, Elsevier Science, 1986
  23. Ryu, H. and A. Monk, "Analysing interaction problems with cyclic interaction theory： Low-level interaction walkthrough", Psychnology Journal, Vol.2, No.3(2004), pp. 304-330
  24. Schoeffel, R., "The concept of product usability： a standard to help manufacturers to help consumers", ISO Bulletin, March(2003), pp.5-7
  25. Te'eni, D., J. Carey and P. Zhang, Humancomputer interaction：Developing effective organizational information systems, John Wiley, New Jersey, 2007
  26. Vilbergsdottir, S., E. Hvannberg and E. Law, "Classification of usability problems(CUP) scheme：Augmentation and exploitation," Proceedings of NordiCHI 2006, 2006, pp. 281-290
  27. Zhang, Z., Overview of usability evaluation methods, Retrieved 20 May 2008, from http://www.usabilityhome.com